A Catalogue of the Severall Sects and Opinions in England and other
Nations: With a briefe Rehearsall of their false and dangerous
Tenents, a propaganda broadsheet denouncing English dissenters from
1647.

Puritanism in this sense was founded as an activist movement within
the Church of England. The founders, clergy exiled under Mary I,
returned to England shortly after the accession of Elizabeth I of
England in 1558.
Puritanism played a significant role in English history during the
first half of the 17th century. One of the most effective stokers of
anti-Catholic feeling was John Pym, whose movement succeeded in taking
control of the government of London at the time of the Grand
Remonstrance of 1641.
PuritansPuritans were blocked from changing the established church from within
and were severely restricted in England by laws controlling the
practice of religion. Their beliefs, however, were transported by the
emigration of congregations to the Netherlands, and later to New
England in North America, and by evangelical clergy to
IrelandIreland (and
later to Wales), and were spread into lay society and parts of the
educational system, particularly certain colleges of the University of
Cambridge. They took on distinctive beliefs about clerical dress and
in opposition to the episcopal system, particularly after the 1619
conclusions of the
Synod of DortSynod of Dort were resisted by the English bishops.
They largely adopted Sabbatarianism in the 17th century, and were
influenced by millennialism.
The
PuritansPuritans were in alliance with the growing commercial world, with
the parliamentary opposition to the royal prerogative, and with the
Scottish Presbyterians in the late 1630s with whom they had much in
common. Consequently, they became a major political force in England
and came to power as a result of the First English Civil War
(1642–46). Almost all Puritan clergy left the Church of England
after the Restoration of 1660 and the 1662 Uniformity Act, with many
continuing to practice their faith in nonconformist denominations,
especially in Congregationalist, as well as in Presbyterian
churches.[2] The nature of the movement in England changed radically,
although it retained its character for a much longer period in New
England.
PuritansPuritans by definition were dissatisfied with the limited extent of
the
English ReformationEnglish Reformation and with the Church of England's tolerance of
practices which they associated with the Catholic Church. They formed
and identified with various religious groups advocating greater purity
of worship and doctrine, as well as personal and group piety. Puritans
adopted a
ReformedReformed theology and, in that sense, were
CalvinistsCalvinists (as
were many of their earlier opponents), but they also took note of
radical criticisms of Zwingli in Zurich and Calvin in Geneva. In
church polity, some advocated separation from all other established
Christian denominations in favour of autonomous gathered churches.
These separatist and independent strands of Puritanism became
prominent in the 1640s, when the supporters of a
PresbyterianPresbyterian polity
in the
Westminster AssemblyWestminster Assembly were unable to forge a new English
national church.
The
PuritansPuritans were never a formally defined sect or religious division
within Protestantism, and the term "Puritan" itself was rarely used to
describe people after the turn of the 18th century. Some Puritan
ideals became incorporated into the Church of England, such as the
formal rejection of Roman Catholicism; some were absorbed into the
many
ProtestantProtestant denominations that emerged in the late 17th and early
18th centuries in the Americas and Britain. The Congregationalist
Churches, widely considered to be a part of the
ReformedReformed tradition,
are descended from the Puritans.[3][4] Moreover, Puritan beliefs are
enshrined in the Savoy Declaration, the confession of faith held by
the Congregationalist Churches, which they originated.[5]
Terminology[edit]

Main article: Definitions of Puritanism
Historically, the word "Puritan" was considered a pejorative term that
characterized
ProtestantProtestant groups as extremists, similar to the Cathars
of France. According to
Thomas FullerThomas Fuller in his Church History, the term
dates to 1564. Archbishop
Matthew ParkerMatthew Parker of that time used it and
"precisian" with the sense of the modern "stickler".[6] In modern
times, the word "puritan" is often used to mean "against pleasure".[7]
The "Puritan" movement referred to the desire and goal of purifying
the
Church of EnglandChurch of England and
Roman CatholicRoman Catholic Church from within, in
contrast to "Separatists" such as the Pilgrims, who believed that the
established churches could not be reformed and the only hope was to
set up separate churches. In this sense, the term "Puritan" was coined
in the 1560s, when it first appeared as a term of abuse for those who
found the
Elizabethan Religious SettlementElizabethan Religious Settlement of 1559 inadequate. The
term Puritan, therefore, was not intended to refer to strict morality,
a common modern misunderstanding, but to a reforming attitude towards
established churches.
The Godly[edit]
The word "Puritan" was applied unevenly to a number of Protestant
churches (and religious groups within the Anglican Church) from the
late 16th century onwards.
PuritansPuritans did not originally use the term
for themselves. The practitioners knew themselves as members of
particular churches or movements, and not by a single term. "Precise
men" and "Precisians" were other early derogatory terms for Puritans,
who preferred to call themselves "the godly" and the "saints".
Seventeenth century English Puritan preacher Thomas Watson used "the
godly" to describe
PuritansPuritans in the title of one of his more famous
works The Godly Man's Picture. The parliament that came into being on
4 July 1653, after a request by
Oliver CromwellOliver Cromwell and the Army Council
of Offices was known by its supporters as the
Parliament of SaintsParliament of Saints and
the Barebones Parliament by its Royalist detractors.
PuritansPuritans and Separatists[edit]
Further information: English Dissenters
Some
PuritansPuritans are known as "non-separating Puritans," those who were
not satisfied with the
ReformationReformation of the
Church of EnglandChurch of England but who
remained within it, advocating further reforms. This group disagreed
among themselves about how much further reformation was possible or
even necessary. Others thought that the
Church of EnglandChurch of England was so
corrupt that true Christians should separate from it altogether; they
are known as "separating Puritans" or simply "Separatists". The term
"Puritan" in the wider sense includes both groups.[8][9] Separatists
had no particular Church title.
The
MayflowerMayflower Pilgrims[10] were referred to only as Separatists.[11]
Plymouth ColonyPlymouth Colony leaders John Robinson and William Brewster were
separatists.[12][13] In contrast,
John WinthropJohn Winthrop and the other main
leaders of Puritan emigration to
New EnglandNew England in 1629 were
non-separating Puritans.[14] There is no current consensus among
modern historians whether Separatists can properly be counted as
Puritans,[15] but separatists and non-separatists alike have
traditionally been viewed as two branches of the Puritan view.
Separating
PuritansPuritans were called "Dissenters," especially after the
English RestorationEnglish Restoration of 1660. The
1662 Uniformity Act1662 Uniformity Act caused almost all
Puritan clergy to leave the Church of England, the so-called Great
Ejection or Black Bartholomew's Day (see below). They were removed in
part because they objected to a Church ruled by bishops and the
requirement that all ministers of the
Church of EnglandChurch of England (deacons,
priests and bishops) be ordained by bishops in the Apostolic
Succession. Some of these 2,000 "ejected" clergymen became
nonconformist ministers (later Congregationalists, Baptists,
Unitarians, Presbyterians, etc.). The movement in England changed
radically at this time, though this change was not as immediate across
the Atlantic (see
History of the PuritansHistory of the Puritans in North America).
PuritansPuritans and Killjoys[edit]
In modern usage, the word "puritan" is often used to describe someone
who adheres to strict, joyless moral or religious principles. In this
usage, hedonism and puritanism are antonyms.[7] In fact, Puritans
embraced sexuality but placed it in the context of marriage. Peter Gay
writes of the Puritans' standard reputation for "dour prudery" as a
"misreading that went unquestioned in the nineteenth century",
commenting how unpuritanical they were in favour of married sexuality,
and in opposition to the Catholic veneration of virginity, citing
Edward Taylor and John Cotton.[16] One Puritan settlement in Western
Massachusetts banished a husband and sent him into exile because he
refused to fulfill his marital duties to his wife.[17]
Summary history[edit]

Main article: History of the Puritans
Puritanism has a historical importance over a period of a century,
followed by 50 years of development in New England. It changed
character and emphasis almost decade-by-decade over that time.
Elizabethan Puritanism[edit]
Further information:
History of the PuritansHistory of the Puritans under Elizabeth I
Elizabethan Puritanism contended with the Elizabethan religious
settlement, with little to show for it. The
Lambeth Articles of 1595,
a high-water mark for
CalvinismCalvinism within the Church of England, failed
to receive royal approval.
Jacobean Puritanism[edit]
Further information:
History of the PuritansHistory of the Puritans under James I
The accession of James I brought the Millenary Petition, a Puritan
manifesto of 1603 for reform of the English church, but James wanted a
new religious settlement along different lines. He called the Hampton
Court Conference in 1604, and heard the teachings of four prominent
Puritan leaders there, including Laurence Chaderton, but largely sided
with his bishops. He was well informed on theological matters by his
education and Scottish upbringing, and he dealt shortly with the
peevish legacy of Elizabethan Puritanism, pursuing an eirenic
religious policy, in which he was arbiter.
Many of his episcopal appointments were Calvinists, notably James
Montague, who was an influential courtier.
PuritansPuritans still opposed much
of the Catholic summation in the Church of England, notably the Book
of Common Prayer, but also the use of non-secular vestments (cap and
gown) during services, the sign of the Cross in baptism, and kneeling
to receive Holy Communion.[18] Some of the bishops under both
Elizabeth and James tried to suppress the Puritan Movement, though
other bishops were more tolerant and, in many places, individual
ministers were able to omit disliked portions of the Book of Common
Prayer.
The Puritan movement of Jacobean times became distinctive by
adaptation and compromise, with the emergence of "semi-separatism,"
"moderate puritanism," the writings of William Bradshaw, who adopted
the term "Puritan" as self-identification, and the beginnings of
congregationalism.[19] Most
PuritansPuritans of this period were
non-separating and remained within the Church of England, and
Separatists who left the
Church of EnglandChurch of England altogether were numerically
much fewer.
Fragmentation and political failure[edit]
Further information:
History of the PuritansHistory of the Puritans from 1649

The Puritan movement in England was riven over decades by emigration
and inconsistent interpretations of Scripture, as well as some
political differences that surfaced at that time. The Fifth Monarchy
Men, a radical millenarian wing of Puritanism, aided by strident,
popular clergy like Vavasor Powell, agitated from the right wing of
the movement, even as sectarian groups like the Ranters, Levellers,
and
QuakersQuakers pulled from the left.[20][21] The fragmentation created a
collapse of the centre and, ultimately, sealed a political failure,
while depositing an enduring spiritual legacy that would remain and
grow in English-speaking Christianity.[22]
The
Westminster AssemblyWestminster Assembly was called in 1643, assembling clergy of the
Church of England. The Assembly was able to agree to the Westminster
Confession of Faith doctrinally, a consistent
ReformedReformed theological
position. The Directory of Public
WorshipWorship was made official in 1645,
and the larger framework (now called the Westminster Standards) was
adopted by the Church of Scotland. In England, the Standards were
contested by Independents up to 1660.[23]
The Westminster Divines, on the other hand, were divided over
questions of church polity and split into factions supporting a
reformed episcopacy, presbyterianism, congregationalism, and
Erastianism. The membership of the Assembly was heavily weighted
towards the Presbyterians, but
Oliver CromwellOliver Cromwell was a Puritan and an
independent Congregationalist separatist who imposed his doctrines
upon them. The
Church of EnglandChurch of England of the
Interregnum (1649–60)Interregnum (1649–60) was
run along
PresbyterianPresbyterian lines but never became a national Presbyterian
church, such as existed in Scotland, and England was not the
theocratic state which leading
PuritansPuritans had called for as "godly
rule".[24]

Great EjectionGreat Ejection and Dissenters[edit]
Further information:
History of the PuritansHistory of the Puritans from 1649
At the time of the
English RestorationEnglish Restoration in 1660, the Savoy Conference
was called to determine a new religious settlement for England and
Wales. Under the Act of Uniformity 1662, the
Church of EnglandChurch of England was
restored to its pre-Civil War constitution with only minor changes,
and the
PuritansPuritans found themselves sidelined. A traditional estimate of
historian Calamy is that around 2,400 Puritan clergy left the Church
in the "Great Ejection" of 1662.[25] At this point, the term
"Dissenter" came to include "Puritan," but more accurately described
those (clergy or lay) who "dissented" from the 1662 Book of Common
Prayer.[citation needed]
The Dissenters divided themselves from all Christians in the Church of
England and established their own separatist congregations in the
1660s and 1670s. An estimated 1,800 of the ejected clergy continued in
some fashion as ministers of religion, according to Richard
Baxter.[25] The government initially attempted to suppress these
schismatic organisations by using the Clarendon Code. There followed a
period in which schemes of "comprehension" were proposed, under which
Presbyterians could be brought back into the Church of England, but
nothing resulted from them. The Whigs opposed the court religious
policies and argued that the Dissenters should be allowed to worship
separately from the established Church, and this position ultimately
prevailed when the Toleration Act was passed in the wake of the
Glorious RevolutionGlorious Revolution in 1689. This permitted the licensing of
Dissenting ministers and the building of chapels. The term
"Nonconformist" generally replaced the term "Dissenter" from the
middle of the 18th century.
Beliefs[edit]
Calvinism[edit]

The idea of personal Biblical interpretation through the Holy Spirit
was central to Puritan beliefs, though it was shared with most
ProtestantsProtestants in general at that time.
PuritansPuritans sought both individual
and corporate conformity to the teaching of the Bible, with moral
purity pursued down to the smallest detail, as well as ecclesiastical
purity to the highest level. They believed that man existed for the
glory of God, that his first concern in life was to do God's will and
so to receive future happiness. They believed that
JesusJesus Christ was
the center of public and personal affairs, and was to be exalted above
all other names.[26] The
PuritansPuritans also believed in limited atonement
(the belief that God only chose a select number of people called the
elect to be saved) and irresistible grace (the elect could not resist
His salvation). The
PuritansPuritans also thought that their religion was the
only way to Heaven.[27]
Diversity[edit]
Various strands of Calvinistic theology in the 17th century were taken
up by different parts of the Puritan movement and, in particular,
AmyraldismAmyraldism was adopted by some influential figures, including John
Davenant, Samuel Ward and, to some extent, Richard Baxter. In the same
fashion, there is no theory of church polity that is uniquely Puritan,
and ideology differed beyond opposition to
ErastianismErastianism (state
control), though even that had its small group of supporters in the
Westminster Assembly. Some approved of the existing church hierarchy
with bishops, but others sought to reform the Episcopal churches on
the
PresbyterianPresbyterian model. Some Separatist
PuritansPuritans were Presbyterian,
but most were early Congregationalists. The separating
Congregationalists believed that the
Divine Right of KingsDivine Right of Kings was heresy
but, on the other hand, there were many royalist Presbyterians, in
terms of allegiance in the political struggle.
Migration also brought out differences and brought together Puritan
communities with their own regional customs and beliefs. The New World
Puritans' policies of church governance diverged from those remaining
in the British Isles, who faced different issues.[28]
Demonology[edit]
PuritansPuritans believed in the active existence of demonic forces, as did
almost all Christians of this period. Puritan pastors undertook
exorcisms for demonic possession in some high-profile cases, and
believed in some allegations of witchcraft. Exorcist
John Darrell was
supported by
Arthur HildershamArthur Hildersham in the case of Thomas Darling.[29]
Samuel Harsnett, a skeptic on witchcraft and possession, attacked
Darrell. However, Harsnett was in the minority, and many clergy, not
only Puritans, believed in witchcraft and possession.[30] The
possession case of Richard Dugdale was taken up by ejected
nonconformist
Thomas JollieThomas Jollie and other local ministers in 1689.
The context of the
Salem witch trialsSalem witch trials of 1692–93 shows the intricacy
of trying to place "Puritan" beliefs as distinctive. The publication
of Saducismus Triumphatus, an anti-skeptical tract that has been
implicated in the moral panic at Salem, involved
Joseph GlanvillJoseph Glanvill (a
latitudinarian) and
Henry MoreHenry More (a Cambridge Platonist) as editors, and
Anthony Horneck, an evangelical German Anglican, as translator of a
pamphlet about a Swedish witch hunt. None of these was a Puritan.
Glanvill and More had been vehemently opposed in the 1670s by sceptic
John Webster, an Independent and sometime chaplain to the
Parliamentary forces.
Millennialism[edit]
Puritan millennialism has been placed in the broader context of
European
ReformedReformed beliefs about the millennium and interpretation of
Biblical prophecy, for which representative figures of the period were
Johannes Piscator, Thomas Brightman, Joseph Mede, Johannes Heinrich
Alsted, and John Amos Comenius.[31] Both Brightman and Mede were
Puritan by conviction, and so are identified as such by their
biographers, though neither clashed with the church authorities. David
Brady describes a "lull before the storm" in the early 17th century,
in which "reasonably restrained and systematic"
ProtestantProtestant exegesis of
the
Book of RevelationBook of Revelation was seen with Brightman, Mede, and Hugh
Broughton, after which "apocalyptic literature became too easily
debased" as it became more populist and less scholarly.[32]
William Lamont argues that, within the church, the Elizabethan
millennial beliefs of John Foxe became sidelined, with Puritans
adopting instead the "centrifugal" doctrines of Thomas Brightman,
while the Laudians replaced the "centripetal" attitude of Foxe to the
"Christian Emperor" by the national and episcopal Church closer to
home, with its royal head, as leading the
ProtestantProtestant world iure divino
(by divine right).[33] Viggo Norskov Olsen writes[34] that Mede "broke
fully away from the Augustinian-Foxian tradition, and is the link
between Brightman and the premillennialism of the 17th century".
The dam broke in 1641 when the traditional retrospective reverence for
Thomas CranmerThomas Cranmer and other martyred bishops in the Acts and Monuments
was displaced by forward-looking attitudes to prophecy among radical
Puritans.[33]
Cultural consequences[edit]

...when Milton essayed drama, it was with explicit Pauline authority
and neither intended for the stage nor in the manner of the
contemporary theatre.

But the sexualisation of Restoration theatre was attacked as strongly
as ever by Thomas Gouge, as Keeble points out.[35]
PuritansPuritans eliminated
the use of musical instruments in their religious services for
theological and practical reasons. The only music remaining in church
services was the setting of the psalms. Church organs were commonly
damaged or destroyed in the Civil War period, such as when an axe was
taken to the organ of
Worcester CathedralWorcester Cathedral in 1642.[36]
Early science[edit]
The
Merton Thesis is an argument about the nature of early
experimental science proposed by Robert K. Merton. Similar to Max
Weber's famous claim on the link between
ProtestantProtestant ethic and the
capitalist economy, Merton argued for a similar positive correlation
between the rise of
ProtestantProtestantPietismPietism in Germany and as well English
Puritanism and early experimental science.[37] The
Merton Thesis has
resulted in continuous debates.[38] As an example, seven of 10 nucleus
members of the
Royal SocietyRoyal Society were Puritans. In the year 1663 sixty-two
percent of the members of the
Royal SocietyRoyal Society were similarly
identified.[39]
Family life[edit]

The Snake in the Grass or Satan Transform'd to an Angel of Light,
title page engraved by Richard Gaywood, ca. 1660

Based on Biblical portrayals of Adam and Eve,
PuritansPuritans believed that
marriage was rooted in procreation, love, and, most importantly,
salvation.[40] Husbands were the spiritual heads of the household,
while women were to demonstrate religious piety and obedience under
male authority.[41] Furthermore, marriage represented not only the
relationship between husband and wife, but also the relationship
between spouses and God. Puritan husbands commanded authority through
family direction and prayer. The female relationship to her husband
and to God was marked by submissiveness and humility.[42]
Thomas GatakerThomas Gataker describes Puritan marriage as:

... together for a time as copartners in grace here, [that] they may
reigne together forever as coheires in glory hereafter.[43]

The paradox created by female inferiority in the public sphere and the
spiritual equality of men and women in marriage, then, gave way to the
informal authority of women concerning matters of the home and
childrearing.[44] With the consent of their husbands, wives made
important decisions concerning the labour of their children, property,
and the management of inns and taverns owned by their husbands.[45]
Pious Puritan mothers laboured for their children's righteousness and
salvation, connecting women directly to matters of religion and
morality.[46] In her poem titled "In Reference to her Children," poet
Anne BradstreetAnne Bradstreet reflects on her role as a mother:

I had eight birds hatched in one nest; Four cocks there were, and hens
the rest. I nursed them up with pain and care, Nor cost nor labour I
did spare.

Bradstreet alludes to the temporality of motherhood by comparing her
children to a flock of birds on the precipice of leaving home. While
PuritansPuritans praised the obedience of young children, they also believed
that, by separating children from their mothers at adolescence,
children could better sustain a superior relationship with God.[47] A
child could only be redeemed through religious education and
obedience. Girls carried the additional burden of Eve's corruption and
were catechised separately from boys at adolescence. Boys' education
prepared them for vocations and leadership roles, while girls were
educated for domestic and religious purposes. The pinnacle of
achievement for children in Puritan society, however, occurred with
the conversion process.[46]
PuritansPuritans viewed the relationship between master and servant similarly
to that of parent and child. Just as parents were expected to uphold
Puritan religious values in the home, masters assumed the parental
responsibility of housing and educating young servants. Older servants
also dwelt with masters and were cared for in the event of illness or
injury. African-American and Indian servants were likely excluded from
such benefits.[48]
New EnglandNew England Puritans[edit]

Interior of the Old Ship Church, a Puritan meetinghouse in Hingham,
Massachusetts.
PuritansPuritans were Calvinists, therefore coherently with
their values they kept their churches unadorned and plain. It is the
oldest building in continuous ecclesiastical use in America and today
serves a
Unitarian UniversalistUnitarian Universalist congregation.

PuritansPuritans left for New England, particularly in the years after 1630,
supporting the founding of the
Massachusetts Bay ColonyMassachusetts Bay Colony and other
settlements among the northern colonies. The large-scale Puritan
emigration to
New EnglandNew England ceased by 1641, with around 21,000 having
moved across the Atlantic. This English-speaking population in America
did not all consist of original colonists, since many returned to
England shortly after arriving on the continent, but it produced more
than 16 million descendants.[49][50] This so-called "Great Migration"
is not so named because of sheer numbers, which were much less than
the number of English citizens who emigrated to
VirginiaVirginia and the
CaribbeanCaribbean during this time.[51] The rapid growth of the New England
colonies (around 700,000 by 1790) was almost entirely due to the high
birth rate and lower death rate per year.[52]
Puritan hegemony lasted for at least a century. That century can be
broken down into three parts: the generation of John Cotton and
Richard Mather, 1630–61 from the founding to the Restoration, years
of virtual independence and nearly autonomous development; the
generation of Increase Mather, 1662–89 from the Restoration and the
Halfway Covenant to the Glorious Revolution, years of struggle with
the British crown; and the generation of Cotton Mather, 1689–1728
from the overthrow of
Edmund AndrosEdmund Andros (in which
Cotton MatherCotton Mather played a
part) and the new charter, mediated by Increase Mather, to the death
of Cotton Mather.[53]
Education[edit]

The
PuritansPuritans were well prepared and well born; among their number was
landed gentry and educated aristocrats. In the area of education, New
England differed from its mother country, where nothing in English
statute required schoolmasters or the literacy of children. The
Puritan model of education in
New EnglandNew England was unique, with the
possible exception of Scotland.
John WinthropJohn Winthrop claimed in 1630 that the
society which they would form in
New EnglandNew England would be "as a city upon
a hill,"[54] and the colony leaders would educate all. These were men
of letters. Hampton's founder, the
ReverendReverend Stephen Bachiler, had
graduated from Oxford, others had attended Cambridge. These men had
communicated with intellectuals and aristocrats from all over Europe.
In 1636, they founded the school that soon became Harvard College.[55]
Besides the Bible, children needed to read to "understand ... the
capital laws of this country," as the Massachusetts code declared,
order being of the utmost importance, and children not taught to read
would grow "barbarous" (the 1648 amendment to the Massachusetts law
and the 1650 Connecticut code both used the word "barbarisme"). By the
1670s, all
New EnglandNew England colonies except
Rhode IslandRhode Island had passed
legislation that mandated literacy for children. In 1647,
Massachusetts passed a law that required towns to hire a schoolmaster
to teach writing.
Forms of schooling ranged from dame schools to "Latin" schools for
boys already literate in English and ready to master preparatory
grammar for Latin, Hebrew, and Greek. Reading schools were often the
single source of education for girls, whereas boys would go to the
town grammar schools. Gender largely determined educational practices;
women introduced all children to reading, and men taught boys in
higher pursuits. Latin grammar schools did not accept girls (nor did
Harvard), since grammar schools were designed to "instruct youth so
far as they may be fited for the university," and girls could play no
role in the ministry. Most evidence suggests that girls could not
attend the less ambitious town schools, the lower-tier writing-reading
schools mandated for townships of over 50 families.
Behavioral regulations[edit]
Further information:
ChristmasChristmas in Puritan New England

In New England, the
PuritansPuritans believed the Puritan controlled
governments were obliged to support their own church, and expected the
church to influence politics and social life.[56] The Plymouth Colony
PuritansPuritans of
New EnglandNew England disapproved of
ChristmasChristmas celebrations, as did
some other
ProtestantProtestant churches of the time. Celebration was outlawed
in
BostonBoston from 1659.[57] The ban was revoked in 1681 by the
English-appointed governor Edmund Andros, who also revoked a Puritan
ban on festivities on Saturday nights.[57] Nevertheless, it was not
until the mid-19th century that celebrating
ChristmasChristmas became more
widely fashionable in the
BostonBoston region.[58] Likewise, the colonies
banned many secular entertainments on moral grounds, such as drama,
dancing, card playing and gambling.[56][59]
They were not, however, opposed to drinking alcohol in moderation.[60]
Early
New EnglandNew England laws banning the sale of alcohol to Native Americans
were criticized because it was "not fit to deprive Indians of any
lawful comfort aloweth to all men by the use of wine." Laws banned the
practice of individuals toasting each other, with the explanation that
it led to wasting God's gift of beer and wine, as well as being
carnal. Bounds were not set on enjoying sexuality within the bounds of
marriage, as a gift from God.[61] Spouses were disciplined if they did
not perform their sexual marital duties, in accordance with 1
Corinthians 7 and other biblical passages. Women and men were equally
expected to fulfill marital responsibilities.[62] Women and men could
file for divorce based on this issue alone. In Massachusetts colony,
which had some of the most liberal colonial divorce laws, one out of
every six divorce petitions was filed on the basis on male
impotence.[63]
PuritansPuritans publicly punished drunkenness and sexual
relations outside marriage.[56] Couples who had sex during their
engagement were fined and publicly humiliated.[56] Men, and a handful
of women, who engaged in homosexual behavior, were seen as especially
sinful, with some executed.[56]
Opposition to other religious views[edit]

The
PuritansPuritans expressed intolerable ideas to others of opposing
religious ideas, including Quaker, Anglican and
BaptistBaptist theologies.
The
PuritansPuritans of the
Massachusetts Bay ColonyMassachusetts Bay Colony were the most active of
the
New EnglandNew England persecutors of Quakers, and the persecuting spirit was
shared by the
Plymouth ColonyPlymouth Colony and the colonies along the Connecticut
river.[64]
In 1660, one of the most notable victims of the religious intolerance
was English
QuakerQuaker Mary Dyer, who was hanged in
BostonBoston for repeatedly
defying a Puritan law banning
QuakersQuakers from the colony.[64] She was one
of the four executed
QuakersQuakers known as the
BostonBoston martyrs. The hanging
of Dyer on
BostonBoston Common marked the beginning of the end of the
Puritan theocracy.[65] In 1661, King Charles II explicitly forbade
Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism.[65] In
1684, England revoked the Massachusetts charter, sent over a royal
governor to enforce English laws in 1686 and, in 1689, passed a broad
Toleration Act.[65]
The first two of the four
BostonBoston martyrs were executed by the Puritans
on 27 October 1659, and in memory of this, 27 October is now
International Religious Freedom Day to recognize the importance of
freedom of religion.[66]
Anti-CatholicAnti-Catholic sentiment appeared in New
England with the first Pilgrim and Puritan settlers.[67] In 1647,
Massachusetts passed a law prohibiting any Jesuit Roman Catholic
priests from entering territory under Puritan jurisdiction.[68] Any
suspected person who could not clear himself was to be banished from
the colony; a second offense carried a death penalty.[69]
The Puritan spirit in the United States[edit]

A copy of The Puritan, a late 19th-century sculpture by Augustus
Saint-Gaudens.

Alexis de TocquevilleAlexis de Tocqueville suggested in
Democracy in AmericaDemocracy in America that
Puritanism was the very thing that provided a firm foundation for
American democracy. As
Sheldon Wolin puts it, "Tocqueville was aware
of the harshness and bigotry of the early colonists". However, on the
other hand, he saw them as "archaic survivals, not only in their piety
and discipline but in their democratic practices".[70] The theme of a
religious basis of economic discipline is echoed in sociologist Max
Weber's work, but both de Tocqueville and Weber argued that this
discipline was not a force of economic determinism, but one factor
among many that should be considered when evaluating the relative
economic success of the Puritans.
Historiography[edit]
The literature on Puritans, particularly biographical literature on
individual Puritan ministers, was already voluminous in the 17th
century and, indeed, the interests of
PuritansPuritans in the narratives of
early life and conversions made the recording of the internal lives
important to them. The historical literature on
PuritansPuritans is, however,
quite problematic and subject to controversies over interpretation.
The early writings are those of the defeated, excluded and victims.
The great interest of authors of the 19th century in Puritan figures
was routinely accused in the 20th century of consisting of anachronism
and the reading back of contemporary concerns.
A debate continues on the definition of "Puritanism".[71] English
historian
Patrick Collinson believes that "Puritanism had no content
beyond what was attributed to it by its opponents."[72] The analysis
of "mainstream Puritanism" in terms of the evolution from it of
Separatist and antinomian groups that did not flourish, and others
that continue to this day, such as
BaptistsBaptists and Quakers, can suffer in
this way. The national context (England and Wales, as well as the
kingdoms of Scotland and Ireland) frames the definition of Puritans,
but was not a self-identification for those
ProtestantsProtestants who saw the
progress of the
Thirty Years' WarThirty Years' War from 1620 as directly bearing on
their denomination, and as a continuation of the religious wars of the
previous century, carried on by the English Civil Wars. English
historian Christopher Hill, who has contributed to analyses of Puritan
concerns that are more respected than accepted, writes of the 1630s,
old church lands, and the accusations that
William LaudWilliam Laud was a
crypto-Catholic:

To the heightened Puritan imagination it seemed that, all over Europe,
the lamps were going out: the Counter-
ReformationReformation was winning back
property for the church as well as souls: and Charles I and his
government, if not allied to the forces of the Counter-Reformation, at
least appeared to have set themselves identical economic and political
objectives.[73]

PuritansPuritans were politically important in England, but it is debated
whether the movement was in any way a party with policies and leaders
before the early 1640s. While Puritanism in
New EnglandNew England was important
culturally for a group of colonial pioneers in America, there have
been many studies trying to pin down exactly what the identifiable
cultural component was. Fundamentally, historians remain dissatisfied
with the grouping as "Puritan" as a working concept for historical
explanation. The conception of a
ProtestantProtestant work ethic, identified
more closely with Calvinist or Puritan principles, has been criticised
at its root,[by whom?] mainly as a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy
aligning economic success with a narrow religious scheme.
Notable Puritans[edit]

Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England,
Scotland, and Ireland

Peter Bulkley was an influential Puritan minister and founder of
Concord.
John Bunyan, famous for The Pilgrim's Progress
William Bradford was Plymouth Colony's Governor.
Anne BradstreetAnne Bradstreet was the first female to have her works published in
the British North American colonies.
Oliver CromwellOliver Cromwell was an English military and political leader and
eventually became Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England,
Scotland and Ireland. He was a very religious man and was considered
an independent Puritan.
John EndecottJohn Endecott was the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony
and an important military leader.
Jonathan Edwards, evangelical preacher who sparked the First Great
Awakening
Anne HutchinsonAnne Hutchinson was a Puritan woman noted for speaking freely about
her religious views, which resulted in her banishment from
Massachusetts Bay Colony.
James NoyesJames Noyes was an influential Puritan minister, teacher and founder
of Newbury.
Thomas Parker was an influential Puritan minister, teacher and founder
of Newbury.
John WinthropJohn Winthrop is noted for his sermon "A Model of Christian Charity"
and as a leading figure in founding the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
Robert Woodford was an English lawyer, largely based at Northampton
and London. His diary for the period 1637-1641 records in detail the
outlook of an educated Puritan.